Case Study (Babson/Springfield)

I know the season has ended but the case studies just continue to get published. This time I wanted to look at Region II. Specifically, the Babson and Springfield ordering. I struggled with these two teams in my ordering before I attempted to figure out the at-large teams so worth another look. I also wanted to look at their selections and how valid they were.

As a reminder, here is the final regional ranking for Region II:

1. MIT

2. Babson

3. Springfield

4. Coast Guard

5. Endicott

6. Emerson

7. Wheaton (MA)

I’m not too concerned about anything other than the 2^nd and 3^rd seeds so let’s compare the two.

Babson/Springfield Comparison

Looking at the comparison, I think it’s obvious which of the two teams is better. Those Springfield wins happened early and in the conference tournament. One happened in Springfield and the other at Babson. If Babson were the better team, then they should have beaten Springfield, right? Well, the selection criteria often have other plans and the Region II RAC obviously felt they needed to listen to that but did they hear correctly?

Babson has common opponent and SOS while Springfield has head-to-head and record. As with many comparisons, it comes down to Ranked Results. Neither team left the area so it should make this easier. Just from the record, we can see that Babson had more ranked losses while Springfield had more bad losses (3 to 0). On the other hand, Springfield had more ranked wins. With the final regional rankings, we can see that Babson’s best wins were Region II #1 and Region II #4. Springfield’s best wins were Region II #2 (twice) and Region I #3. This is a pretty close comparison and all things being equal, I give the edge to Springfield because in the end they are the better team (head-to-head). But, as I’ve often said, in these cases, where two teams are virtually tied, give the edge to the team that has the best chance at an at-large selection. With all of the ranked results being in the area, I would side with Babson as their SOS is better and the record is virtually the same.

What I think we need to learn from this is that the New England regions (now Region I and II) are experts at the selection game. Despite Springfield being the better team, they know to put Babson ahead of them. This is not an isolated incident as they’ve done this type of stuff for years and it leads to a lot of at-large bids. When I look at other regions that don’t do this type of movement, I have to just shake my head. Region II is showing you that they will do this so why doesn’t everyone else follow? I have no clue. (Let’s not forget that Region I added two new teams to their rankings while Region II added one. Whether correct or not, this gave additional ranked wins to teams that would ultimately receive at-large bids in their regions. Well played, again, by New England!)

Summary -> The Babson/Springfield ordering is, in my opinion, incorrect per the criteria but correct for the purposes of having the best chance at getting a team an at-large bid.

Selection

The other thing I wanted to look at here was whether these two teams deserved to be selected. I had a tough time getting them selected in my mock because I didn’t respect their ranked wins. I think this is an obvious position to take but one that the selection committee never does. They continue to allow New England teams to stay in region, never play anyone and credit them with quality wins as if they are playing elite teams.

One thing Ricky Nelson said in one of his posts was that these teams probably were linked because their criteria was so similar. When you consider that head-to-head and common opponent are removed from the national selection process because these teams did not travel, this is probably correct although as you’ll see below there were differences.

In order to figure out whether these two teams should have been selected, we need to identify teams that were positioned for selection but didn’t make it. These teams were Amherst, Brockport, Montclair State, Messiah, Birmingham-Southern, Denison, UW-Oshkosh, St. Olaf and Pomona-Pitzer.

Most of these comparisons are going to get to Ranked Results but let’s breakdown the criteria scorecard for each when compared against Babson (first record) and Springfield (second record):

• Amherst 1-2 & 2-1

• Brockport 0-3 & 0-1

• Montclair State 0-2 & 0-2

• Messiah 0-1 & 1-1

• BSC 0-2 & 1-1

• Denison 0-2 & 1-1

• UW-Oshkosh 0-2 & 1-1

• St. Olaf 0-2 & 1-1

• Pomona-Pitzer 0-2 & 0-2

Any of the above where you see a “losing record” of 2 or more means that they would have lost a comparison with either Babson and Springfield (if using a strict criteria scorecard). So, we can eliminate Montclair State and Pomona-Pitzer. Babson can also eliminate Brockport, BSC, Denison, Oshkosh and St. Olaf. Springfield can’t eliminate anyone other than Montclair State and Pomona-Pitzer. I hope this small example shows why Babson was the better national at-large bid candidate for the region. They only had to beat out Amherst and Messiah while Springfield had to beat out 7 teams!

Let’s tackle the easier case of Babson first. Amherst has the same Ranked Results issues as I believe Babson has. Amherst had a win over Wesleyan (Region I #2) but also had a bad loss. It’s not enough for me to take them over Babson. Messiah’s best ranked win was a #5 team so, again, not enough for me to take them over Babson when they also had bad losses.

That’s a mess of comparisons for Springfield so let me try to make it brief here; Amherst has a good claim to be selected over Springfield (although I take Springfield), no on Brockport, Messiah has a claim but I probably take Springfield, BSC has a good claim, Denison should have gotten in over Springfield, Oshkosh should have gotten in over Springfield and no on St. Olaf. In my Selection Eve article, I had Springfield ranked higher than Babson and they were my last team in the tournament. If I had the order correct (I mean I did but not RAC correct), Babson would have gotten in and Springfield would have been shut out by either BSC, Denison or Oshkosh. I had those last two teams selected in my mock.

Summary -> Babson was a good selection per the selection criteria. Springfield was not and should not have received an at-large. A more qualified team per the selection criteria (specifically Denison & Oshkosh) was left out of the tournament. Again, the comparisons came down to Ranked Results and, again, the national selection committee continues to favor the New England teams for no apparent reason. I keep thinking the other regions that get negatively impacted by these decisions year-after-year will revolt at some point but maybe getting their teams into the tournament is not as important to them as it is the New England Regions?